McNally and Jastremski sue the NFL?

[Fencer]

Not sure but to me couldn't Kraft claim he suspended based on the NELs statements, evidence, comments, and he was deceived by the fact that NFL defamed him?

The Pats had access to so much of the same evidence that the NFL did that it's not clear why they would be much influenced by the Wells report.

 

[reneluar]

Im curious if Pats have video footage from months ago, nfl referees said they never let mcnally walk alone with the footballs and the security guards said other thing, somebody lie.

 

[ChoWZa]

It baffles me why they weren't referred to as Person X, and Person Z in the report. I can't imagine either of them losing a defamation case. These are just 2 clowns with a crap job who the NFL made the center of attention for weeks on end.

 

[robbomango]

Im curious if Pats have video footage from months ago, nfl referees said they never let mcnally walk alone with the footballs and the security guards said other thing, somebody lie.

How about footage of the week before, Ravens game? The circumstance were similar in regards to a crowded playoff environment. If the report suggests he does this during the regular season when no ones in the room, just check the film for the previous playoff game when he should'v gone to the bathroom to do the same thing.

 

[50-yard-line]

I don't know what McNally did and I don't know what Jastremski did. I know nothing about either of these guys.

Way back when I posted an alternate theory to the "crime": that Brady was putting the heat of Jastremski and so he and McNally popped a pin in the balls when they could to take a little off the top, so to speak...in this scenario, two or even just the one, low-level guys didn't want to take any crap from the big guys up top.

Given the way the balls are handled, with refs over-inflating or giving squeeze tests, or whatever, they probably didn't think it was a big deal. And hey, Brady wouldn't freak out at them after games, right?

It's just an alternate theory - it's nothing that's proven AT ALL in the report.

Which is exactly what the NFL is doing, concocting a theory based on supposition, their understanding of human nature, their BIAS against the Patriots, or whatever.

But consider this: to believe that McNally was doing what the NFL said, you have to believe that he went into the bathroom and stuck a needle into 12 footballs in 100 seconds WITH ONLY A MODICUM OF PRECISION.

Aren't we told that Brady is "meticulous" and even obsessive over the balls? But then we're to believe that Brady would want a guy sticking a pin into 12 balls to partially deflate them without a gauge? Without a pump to put some air back in in case he screwed up? In that scenario, popping a pin into twelve balls in short order, under duress, the variances of the psi would not come out even, maybe not even close.

So we are to believe that Brady wants them a certain way, then has a role in making sure they can't be a certain way, because of the inexact manner of the secretive and illegal deflation.

That doesn't make much sense.

I'm more convinced than ever that Brady was leaning on Jastremski to make sure the balls were at 12.5 by making sure the refs put them at 12.5.

 

[RobertWeathers]

It baffles me why they weren't referred to as Person X, and Person Z in the report. I can't imagine either of them losing a defamation case. These are just 2 clowns with a crap job who the NFL made the center of attention for weeks on end.

Their jobs do suck but I'd do it for a week or a Sunday.

 

[brownj12]

It baffles me why they weren't referred to as Person X, and Person Z in the report. I can't imagine either of them losing a defamation case. These are just 2 clowns with a crap job who the NFL made the center of attention for weeks on end.

Defamation, even without the Malicious intent requirement is incredibly hard to prove. There are two big issues. First, it is not the requirement of the person who made the statement to prove it is true in defense, it is the requirement of the person claiming defamation to prove that the statements are false. If they could definitively prove the statements made about them are false they Patriots would be all over this. Unfortunately the same arguments about the different gauges and relying on Anderson's best recollection that make this impossible to pin on deflation happening can be reversed and make it impossible for them to prove it definitely did not happen.

The other issue is that typically only statements presented as facts are actionable in a defamation suit. Well's was clear in the report to state when it was his interpretation, or what he believed was the most likely interpretation. There is nothing there that is actionable in a defamation suit.

For those who mentioned wrongful termination, that is 100% a non-starter. Wrongful termination does not mean getting fired for a stupid, or even false reason. Wrongful termination is very specific, and it protects you from being terminated for legally protected reasons, i.e. race, age, or gender. None of that comes into play here.

 

[upstater1]

Has anyone wondered why Jaz's texts about the 16 PSI balls tested a day after the Jets game weren't more revealing?

I mean, shouldn't Jaz's response in the texts have been, "Freakin' Bird, he didn't bother deflating the dang footballs!!!!!"

Instead he wrote, "The refs never checked the gauges after they inflated them!!!"

Isn't that pretty telling?

 

[IllegalContact]

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Im curious if Pats have video footage from months ago, nfl referees said they never let mcnally walk alone with the footballs and the security guards said other thing, somebody lie.

FWIW, the report says that the security footage rolls over every 10 days, so there would be nothing older than 10 days on it (other than anything NE security chose to copy before it was auto-erased).

 

[aluminum seats]

The Pats are the ones that suspended McNally and Jastrewski, right? Even before the discipline came down from the league. And of course they were their employers.

That complicates things, I would think. First of all, it would make a wrongful termination suit harder. Second, while it sounds like it leaves defamation open, the Pats had all the information in the report and more, and so it's hard to see how the report could be construed as defamation leading to their dismissal.

Please tell me I'm wrong.

I don't think I've seen anyone on the board address this, apologies if I missed it: why did the Pats suspend these guys?